SynthesisBMC cancer2025
The impact of digital interactive interventions on survivorship outcomes in prostate cancer: a systematic narrative review.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is the second most common male malignancy, with high survival yet substantial long-term challenges. Digital interventions provide scalable support for survivorship, though evidence of effectiveness remains mixed. This systematic narrative review aimed to identify and describe the effectiveness of digital interactive interventions on survivorship outcomes in PCa survivors.
methodsA systematic review using the narrative approach following the PRISMA guideline was performed. We searched databases of Web of Science, PubMed (including Medline), Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL without date restrictions, focusing on English-language interventional studies. Using the PICOS framework, two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of retrieved studies. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, ROBINS-I, and NIH tools. Due to heterogeneity of selected studies, data synthesis was performed narratively.
resultsA total of 24 studies, published between 2012 and 2024 and employing diverse designs and interventions, were included from 2,422 retrieved records. Various interventions were used such as a web-based, mobile apps, telehealth coaching, telenursing, IoT-based programs, peer-led support, and online education. Urinary symptoms consistently improved, with some sustained benefits up to 12 months. Quality of life (QoL), psychological outcomes, self-efficacy, self-care capacity, and physical activity improved in most studies. Sexual function showed mixed results, with modest gains in some but no change or declines in others. Hormonal and bowel outcomes showed limited benefits. Sleep and fatigue results were inconsistent, with minor self-reported improvements but little objective change.
conclusionsDigital interventions enhance urinary function, QoL, psychological well-being, and self-efficacy in PCa survivors, particularly through tailored, multi-component designs. However, their effects on sexual, hormonal, and bowel symptoms are inconsistent, with overall limited impacts. Advancing standardized outcomes, long-term trials, and hybrid digital-interpersonal models is essential to optimize the management of persistent symptoms and support equitable access.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.